Stop the boats. 5k a head. (cont. in Part 2)

[JeffDunne]

Tedjo just let the cat out of the bag.

We don't stop boats, Indonesia does.

 

[pokerspiv]

And live where and do what for the years it takes to get approved, majority of these people are desperate that's why they risk life to get here.
We should have kept out of their countries in the 1st place, after we bom the f..k out them in the name of peace destroy their homes and lives it's easy to see why you would want to get out.

Your goalposts move like Jagger

 

[raghav]

Tedjo just let the cat out of the bag.

We don't stop boats, Indonesia does.

He should've also said that they allow the so called refugees into Indonesia knowing full well that they are potential customers of people smugglers.

 

[pazza]

How convenient.

Pretend history we don't like didnt happened and everything is okay.

Of course since we are ignoring history lets advocate for the same failed policies. If thousands end up dead or in detention we can just pretend it didn't happen again.

Again that part of the whole thing is irrelevant to the current report.

I'm astounded people here are defending those engaging in horrid behaviour towards asylum seekers in detention, particularly children, by only talking about numbers.

 

[raghav]

I did not no they had proper places in war torn areas, You seem certain IsIs had a place put aside as well as the Taliban to que through proper channels, you should go over take the family and show them how easy it is.

So all the boat people including the so called 10000 still in Indonesia all came from countries that are war torn because of Isis and the Taliban?

 

[JeffDunne]

He should've also said that they allow the so called refugees into Indonesia knowing full well that they are potential customers of people smugglers.

I thought the story went these people destroy their documents in Indonesia?

If they have documentation, why would Indonesia deny them entry?

 

[Qsaint]

If they have documentation, why would Indonesia deny them entry?

Because they have no valid reason to be in Indonesia?

 

[Gough]

I for one am outraged that a someone would try to politicise the refugee issue to score points with a domestic audience.

 

[JeffDunne]

Because they have no valid reason to be in Indonesia?

Isn't that up to the Indonesians to decide?

 

[raghav]

I thought the story went these people destroy their documents in Indonesia?

If they have documentation, why would Indonesia deny them entry?

Exactly, the question has to be asked of them, the same as you and me, what is the purpose of your visit and how long do you plan to stay?
Further, what type of visa do they arrive on that allows them to stay for years? There is no doubt that the Indonesian officials know why they have come and there is no doubt in my mind that they encourage them to pursue that avenue of entry into Australia and have done so for years. We are talking about Indonesian (Javanese predominantly) officials here who are well known for bending the rules for the right price.

 

[little graham]

 

[Malifice]

Yes, and yes. Since we are not actually detaining anyone against their will. They are only in detention until such time as they drop their asylum claim, and they would never have been there in the first place if they had applied through proper channels.

You are officially the worst ****ing 'libertarian' ever.

 

[Lebbo73]

You are officially the worst ******* 'libertarian' ever.

The Tea Party believes in having total control of your borders. **** that, commonsense tells you that you should control your borders. Do you have any Mal?

 

[Brown Bottle]

Total control of your borders? Common sense would tell you that is inordinately expensive when you have one of the world's longest coastlines, but who ever let common sense get in the way of anything?

 

[Malifice]

The Tea Party believes in having total control of your borders. **** that, commonsense tells you that you should control your borders. Do you have any Mal?

If you think mandatory and indefinate detention of people (including children) by the State with no judicial scrutiny is 'libertarian' you're out of your ****ing mind.

I'f the State takes away your gun you scream tyranny. If the State raises taxes its tyranny. If the State restricts what you say its tyranny.

Apparently it's fine for the State to lock you and your kids up with no charge, no appeals allowed, no requirement for procedural fairness or natural justice. And at gunpoint.

Hypocrite.

 

[Gough]

I'd be more worried about untreatable TB coming into Australia, although most of the people who live in at risk areas would appear to do so as a lifestyle choice.

 

[Lebbo73]

If you think mandatory and indefinate detention of people (including children) by the State with no judicial scrutiny is 'libertarian' you're out of your ******* mind.

I'f the State takes away your gun you scream tyranny. If the State raises taxes its tyranny. If the State restricts what you say its tyranny.

Apparently it's fine for the State to lock you and your kids up with no charge, no appeals allowed, no requirement for procedural fairness or natural justice. And at gunpoint.

Hypocrite.

I never said that. I have only ever said I agree with their policy of stopping people smugglers profiting from illegal activities. If people choose to use criminals, they have made their own bed.

 

[Max zero]

Again that part of the whole thing is irrelevant to the current report.

I'm astounded people here are defending those engaging in horrid behaviour towards asylum seekers in detention, particularly children, by only talking about numbers.

I'm astounded that 1000+ dead and 2000+ in detention is ignored while 150 in detention (and falling) is a national disgrace.

Which is worse 2000 kids (and rising) in detention or 150 in detention (and falling)?

Sure in a perfect would we would have none. But we don't live in a Disney movie and sometimes you have to choose between two bad choices. Being too cowardly to make any decision will simply make it worse for everyone.

I take it you support Rudds policies that got us in this mess in the first place?

 

[Malifice]

I never said that. I have only ever said I agree with their policy of stopping people smugglers profiting from illegal activities. If people choose to use criminals, they have made their own bed.

Policy and law are very different things mate. Libertarians concern themselves with the relationship of the State and the individual. They are constantly mindful of tyranny.

Take away your assault rifle and tell you its now unlawful to abuse brown people? You cry foul.

But when the same State impriosons those same brown people, with no transparency, accountability or fairness and that's apparently fair ****ing game.

Supporting the State having the power of mandatory detention outside of any juridical scrutiny and without having to afford procedural fairness - and at freaking gunpoint - is not 'libertarian'.

It's the exact opposite.

You're not a libertarian. You only give a toss about your own Liberty, not anyone else's. You're a conservative in sheeps clothing.

 

[medusala]

I'm looking forward to Abbott's response to this one. If it happens it then means that he has only achieved one thing in 18 months of government in rolling back the Carbon Tax which hasn't achieved anything except making the rest of the world realise how much of an environmental backwater Australia is.

The rest of the world doesn't give a stuff re Australia and its carbon tax.

But when the same State impriosons those same brown people, with no transparency, accountability or fairness and that's apparently fair ******* game.

Come on Mal, you know they are free to leave if they wish. Still pathetically trying to play the racist card I see.

 

[Lebbo73]

Policy and law are very different things mate. Libertarians concern themselves with the relationship of the State and the individual. They are constantly mindful of tyranny.

Take away your assault rifle and tell you its now unlawful to abuse brown people? You cry foul.

But when the same State impriosons those same brown people, with no transparency, accountability or fairness and that's apparently fair ******* game.

Supporting the State having the power of mandatory detention outside of any juridical scrutiny and without having to afford procedural fairness - and at freaking gunpoint - is not 'libertarian'.

It's the exact opposite.

You're not a libertarian. You only give a toss about your own Liberty, not anyone else's. You're a conservative in sheeps clothing.

Tea Party Mal. Get it right!

 

[pazza]

I'm astounded that 1000+ dead and 2000+ in detention is ignored while 150 in detention (and falling) is a national disgrace.

Which is worse 2000 kids (and rising) in detention or 150 in detention (and falling)?

Sure in a perfect would we would have none. But we don't live in a Disney movie and sometimes you have to choose between two bad choices. Being too cowardly to make any decision will simply make it worse for everyone.

I take it you support Rudds policies that got us in this mess in the first place?

Absolutely not.

I would prefer Australia actually doing something meaningful and legal under the laws and conventions it co-wrote and signed to.

No mandatory detention offshore anywhere.
No children in detention, no matter how they arrive.
Onshore processing.
Refugees sourced from camps directly.

The problem with your comment is that, you are only focusing on the numbers and not the treatment...the attempted and actual suicides, the assaults and sexual assaults.

 

[medusala]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...efugees?_ga=1.259283530.1178457234.1387536925

The Syrian operative claimed more than 4,000 covert ISIS gunmen had been smuggled into western nations – hidden amongst innocent refugees

 

[Max zero]

Absolutely not.

I would prefer Australia actually doing something meaningful and legal under the laws and conventions it co-wrote and signed to.

No mandatory detention offshore anywhere.
No children in detention, no matter how they arrive.
Onshore processing.
Refugees sourced from camps directly.

The problem with your comment is that, you are only focusing on the numbers and not the treatment...the attempted and actual suicides, the assaults and sexual assaults.

The problem with your comment is that your desires are just pie in the sky wish thinking with no means to attain them.

I would love it if there were no wars or poverty in the world. Who doesn't but how to we achieve that?

Rudd tried the 'humanitarian way' and look at the results. Southern Europe is trying the 'humanitarian way' and look how well its going for them.

What would you do different? Why would your humanitarian way not end up with the same results? Why should we trust you gamble with thousands of lives when the track record of your approach contains nothing but failure and death?

 

[Brown Bottle]

Take that to the bank Meds. One thing we know about ISIS - they have no interest in drumming up public interest by doing things like releasing videos of beheadings on youtube, and they sure would hate being referred to as a death cult, etc.

Very low key 'organisation' with no interest in misinformation. You should probably join